Name taken without due process ?!?!

[LewR]

Long story made short - I owned OlympicStores.com. I received a C&D from an attorney representing the US Olympic committee stating they have a TM on the word Olympic and every website that has that word.

I called and spoke to the attorney in person - and he suggested that of the thousands of names they were going after, mine was in the bottom third of names they were really interested in. He also told me that he would be getting back to me if they decided to pursue action with regard to my domain name. In the meantime, I stopped sending the traffic from the name to any site which sold anything. And I trusted the lawyer? Sheeesh.

I just found that the name was transferred away from my account to the International Olympic Committee without ever being told. My registrar never informed me - I received no papers in the mail - no calls - NADA!!

Presently I am trying to get more information from my reigstrar as to why they gave over my domain name without notification. So far, the original reply only stated:

"This domain was not stolen, there was a dispute over it.
US Olympic Committee et al v. 2000Olympic.com"

Am I wrong to expect a due process when stealing a domain name from it's owner? There are about 380 registered TM's on the word Olympic, including cameras and other commodities - how can the Olympic Committee claim exclusive rights to the word? I am so pissed ...


Comments folks???

[Garry Anderson]

We have the word 'olympic' used in trademarks here in the UK.

The authorities are corrupt - the legal term is trademark overreach.

The authorities aid and abet US Olympic Committee to violate trademark and competition law.

Just one example of registered trademark - earliest I could find was 1914 (UK database is a load of kack):

Mark Text : OLYMPIC
Status: Registered
Class: 25
Filing Date: 01.04.1914
Next Renewal Date: 01.04.2008
List of goods and/or services: Class 25: Boots and shoes.
Proprietor: Stylo Barratt Shoes Limited, Stylo House,Harrogate Road,Apperley Bridge,Bradford,BD10 0NW
Residence Country: United Kingdom

It should be noted that there is no legal requirement for you to register any words as trademark to use it in business or for personal use.

Take for example the word 'apple'. It is legally used by thousands of businesses - large and small all over the world. Indeed, it is impossible that they all register themselves as trademarks - they are bound to conflict with many others, being confusingly similar. In my local phone book alone, there are at least five using this word - two garages (seems not connected), a car centre, fruit growers and a decorating firm.

You should not use these words for illegal purposes though - e.g. passing yourself off as US Olympic Committee.

Nobody can pass off as US government site as they have .gov !

Passing off as registered trademark would be impossible with protected TLD of .reg - simple.

This could be used as certificate of authentication and directory - format: name.class.country.reg - every trademark word can be identified.

e.g. apple.com is directed to apple.computer.us.reg - or that URL is entered directly.

For example, the recent fraud here in the UK: People could have checked address bar for barclays.bank.uk.reg

But authorities are not interested in protecting the public from consumer confusion - just aiding corporations to violate the law.

Even if this solution was not available - they would still be guilty of trademark overreach. This is providing you were doing nothing illegal on your site - like passing off.

These are my findings and informed opinion IANAL - so you should check these facts with a lawyer. I doubt they will be able to refute them - although, with financial interest in continued disputes, they may try make false excuses to divert attention away.

Please get back if anybody says different.

[actnow]

LewR,

Who did (past tense) you have the domain registered with?

And, why did the registrar just roll over when confronted?

Especially, since Network Sol. is getting sued for releasing a
domain with fraudulent documents.

[namedropper]

While it's extremely disturbing that a registrar would just hand a name over, and we should all be told who it is to make sure we don't do business with them, if the name had gone to dispute you would have had next to no chance to keep it. The method used is highly suspect, if not outright illegal, but the end result is the same.

[seeker]

this is absolutely ridiculous. The US Olympic Committee owns the trademark on Olympic? A greek word, and the name of the national airline of Greece???


Absolutely ridiculous.
And if indeed they did do that, please provide (PM) me more details, and I *assure* you, the real International Olympic Committee will hear of this loud and clear...

[draqon]

maybe this is God's way of punishing you for not paying me my $1,000 for flaw.com?

[LewR]

Dragon - didn't know your nick - This is old news - I told you what the selling price was - and what it cost me to market it. On top of that, I am still fighting with IRS as the buyers of flaw listed the payment as a royalty to me.

email or call me, we should talk. If you still felt something wasn't right, you should have said something before 3 years went by. The $ value surprises me as well, guess I will have to dig up my archives from back then. I never cheated anyone out of even $1, so this took me totaly by surprise.

[LewR]

Latest email from registrar simply states:

"The domain was transferred as per section 3 of the
registration agreement, to comply with a court order."

So, there was a court order - which I now have asked the registrar for. Now, if there are court procedings, why wasn't I made aware of them? Can the court just work in the dark and never tell the defendant that there will be a court date or hearing? I don't think so - and if it was the US Olympic committee that was suing, why did the International Committee wind up with the domain?

The drama continues - thanks for the commentary thus far.

BTW - The Registrar is DotRegistrar.com where I have never had problems before with more than 4,000 names I have registered there.

[LewR]

Still collecting information - seems that 818 domains were give to the committee by a court action filed in VA.

If there is a court action - I need to be notified - and since I was not, the action of this Judge to issue such a ruling is ILLEGAL and needs to be overturned and the Judge - who violated basic constitutional law should go to jail...

[namedropper]

Originally posted by LewR
BTW - The Registrar is DotRegistrar.com where I have never had problems before with more than 4,000 names I have registered there.

Well, if I hadn't already transferred out the last of my names there a few weeks ago you can be sure I'd be transferring them now.

[LewR]

Before I go pulling thousands of names - I want to find out all the details. I am still hoping to get some more feedback here.

[jberryhill]

First of all, you can ignore all of Mr. Anderson's remarks about trademarks, because the US Olympic Committee has their own statute - entirely apart from trademark law - concerning use of the term Olympic, and THAT is the legal basis for the ongoing court case involving a very large number of domain names registered to Americans and containing "olympic" terms.

If you read the ACPA (start at section d here):
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/15/1125.html

...you'll notice the reference to "section 220506 of title 36". That section is otherwise known as the Jim Thorpe Amateur Athletics Act. It is part of the charter of the US Olympic Committee (and, yes, to the commentator above, the International Committee fully endorses this law). The operative part is as follows:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...e:+36USC220506

Sec. 220506. Exclusive right to name, seals, emblems, and badges

(a) Exclusive Right of Corporation.--Except as provided in
subsection (d) of this section, the corporation has the exclusive right
to use--
(1) the name ``United States Olympic Committee'';
(2) the symbol of the International Olympic Committee,
consisting of 5 interlocking rings, the symbol of the International
Paralympic Committee, consisting of 3 TaiGeuks, or the symbol of the
Pan-American Sports Organization, consisting of a torch surrounded
by concentric rings;
(3) the emblem of the corporation, consisting of an escutcheon
having a blue chief and vertically extending red and white bars on
the base with 5 interlocking rings displayed on the chief; and
(4) the words ``Olympic'', ``Olympiad'', ``Citius Altius
Fortius'', ``Paralympic'', ``Paralympiad'', ``Pan-American'',
``America Espirito Sport Fraternite'', or any combination of those
words.

[and if you care about the exceptions, i.e. the reason WHY you see other trademarks and uses of the word "Olympic"}:

(d) Pre-Existing and Geographic Reference Rights.--(1) A person who
actually used the emblem described in subsection (a)(3) of this section,
or the words or any combination of the words described in subsection
(a)(4) of this section, for any lawful purpose before September 21,
1950, is not prohibited by this section from continuing the lawful use
for the same purpose and for the same goods or services.
(2) A person who actually used, or whose assignor actually used, the
words or any combination of the words described in subsection (a)(4) of
this section, or a trademark, trade name, sign, symbol, or insignia
described in subsection (c)(4) of this section, for any lawful purpose
before September 21, 1950, is not prohibited by this section from
continuing the lawful use for the same purpose and for the same goods or
services.
(3) Use of the word ``Olympic'' to identify a business or goods or
services is permitted by this section where--
(A) such use is not combined with any of the intellectual
properties referenced in subsections \1\ (a) or (c) of this section;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ So in original. Probably should be ``subsection''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) it is evident from the circumstances that such use of the
word ``Olympic'' refers to the naturally occurring mountains or
geographical region of the same name that were named prior to
February 6, 1998, and not to the corporation or any Olympic
activity; and
(C) such business, goods, or services are operated, sold, and
marketed in the State of Washington west of the Cascade Mountain
range and operations, sales, and marketing outside of this area are
not substantial.

-----------------

Okay, so, the bottom line is basically that you can use the word "Olympic" in the US as a business identifier if you are in Olympia Washington, or if you were doing so before 1950 (such as the paint and varnish people). There is nothing in there about "passing off", which Mr. Anderson believes is the only existing cause of action relating to trademarks. In any event, the law relating to the word "Olympic" stands on its own and is not about trademarks.

Now, here's what's going on with your domain name. There is a longstanding suit involving about a bazillion olympic-formative domain names. As per the rules that the registrars - all of the registrars - are required to follow, these names were locked up on hold a long time ago. You can find more than you ever wanted to know about the suit, and the list of the bazillion domain names, here:

http://www.sgbdc.com/IOCinremsuit.htm

The problem is that a while back, some of the registrars screwed up and released a bunch of these domain names, despite the fact that there had been court orders relevant to these domain names. Now, if you bother to read your domain name registration contract - ANY domain name registration contract, it doesn't matter which registrar - they have full power to correct any "registration errors" or to do whatever they are ordered by a court to do.

I would be interested to know how long you had the domain name. The firm pursuing the suit has been chasing after these names as time permits, and it sounds like they finally caught up with yours. So, the bottom line is that, yes, there probably was a court order, but no, you didn't hear about it because it probably pre-dated your registration.

[jberryhill]

"how can the Olympic Committee claim exclusive rights to the word?"

Are we clear on that question?

[jberryhill]

"please provide (PM) me more details, and I *assure* you, the real International Olympic Committee will hear of this loud and clear"

Sigh....

http://www.sgbdc.com/IOCinremsuit.htm
"You can download a copy of the complaint in the above-captioned case that was filed on behalf of the United States Olympic Committee, the International Olympic Committee and Salt Lake Organizing Committee for the Olympic Winter Games of 2002 (collectively the “Olympic Plaintiffs”) regarding domain names that contain the trademarks “Olympic” and “Olympiad” and simulations and foreign equivalents of those marks (the “Domain Names”). "

Dude, the IOC is one of the plaintiffs in the action. Not only have they heard of this "loud and clear", but they are paying the bill.

[yesonline]

Hi there, I have a very similar case now happens to me, and even worse, I did not get any C&D notice nor any contact from any parties, no body told me or informed me anything, until I found my website was not able to be accessed and checked out the whois, then I found 2 of my domains just disappered from my account and went to the other registrant.
These 2 domains I registered and built a living website one and half years ago.
Now I am waiting the response from my registrar, I will disclose the case and registrar in few days if the case is not resolved.
I have no problem if there is any law action or WIPO action against me, I will do anything by law or by rule, but not this way!! I feel I am robbed and without any chances to defend.
I will need your help if I can not get a answer from my registrar.
Thanks in advance.

[LewR]

Wow, I find all of this amazing - I am looking up my paperwork as to when I received the original C&D - and also see if I can find the original registration date. As the name is still with the same registrar - I believe that the Feb 7, 2002 date could well be the date I registered the name. I picked it up on the day it dropped, if I remember right, but not through any drop service. I believe it was the name of { a chain of department stores that went out of business. }

I appreciate this information. I just wonder how they were able to get such a blanket "free pass" that flies in the face of logic and the constitution. I wonder if they were wearing tall leather boots as they clicked their heels...

If this name was owned by someone outside the US, jurisdiction would be by that of the owner or that of the registrar?

[jberryhill]

"If this name was owned by someone outside the US, jurisdiction would be by that of the owner or that of the registrar?"

Jurisdiction for what purpose?

For an in rem suit against a .com domain name under the ACPA, jurisdiction can always be had in Virginia (if the other requirements of the act are met), since that is where the .com registry is located.

If the domain name was under the control of the court, but had dropped accidentally, then I don't see why you think there is something unconstitutional or otherwise wrong about the registrar carrying out the terms of the contract to which you agreed when you registered the domain name.

[LewR]

Originally posted by jberryhill

If the domain name was under the control of the court, but had dropped accidentally, then I don't see why you think there is something unconstitutional or otherwise wrong about the registrar carrying out the terms of the contract to which you agreed when you registered the domain name.

When I received the C&D, it did not say that the name was involved any court action. If indeed it was already under the jurisdiction of a court order - why would they send me a C&D ? I ask seriously as I do not know - seems it would be a waste of resources to do so when they could have just taken the name as they did in the end.

The court order I lost my name under is dated April 4, 2003 - a year after my registration - I will email you the pdf that the registrar sent me. Seems I should have had some input into that proceeding.

But then again, that is why I hire attorneys...

[Garry Anderson]

J> First of all, you can ignore all of Mr. Anderson's remarks about trademarks, because the US Olympic Committee has their own statute - entirely apart from trademark law - concerning use of the term Olympic, and THAT is the legal basis for the ongoing court case involving a very large number of domain names registered to Americans and containing "olympic" terms.

Sorry - I did not know their was a god on earth that could stop people using any particular word.

I think it blinking disgusting that you are not allowed to use the word for personal use - say, for example, to complain about Olympic Committee bribery that sometimes goes on (apparently).

If people can use "olympic" for personal use - how could they take the domains away, if it was not proven that each one was used identify a business or goods.

J> There is nothing in there about "passing off", which Mr. Anderson believes is the only existing cause of action relating to trademarks.

John - please don't misrepresent me. Where did you get that stupid idea from?

My usual phrase is along the lines of, "that you do nothing illegal - like passing off".

J> In any event, the law relating to the word "Olympic" stands on its own and is not about trademarks.

I disagree, it sounds like some sort of super-duper "don't you fecking mess with me" mega-trademark.

John, shouldn't we delete the word "olympic" from all these posts - just to be on the safe side ;-)

[zouzas]

at least they got this right www.olympic.us should be bringing alot of exposure to the US extension.

usolympicteam.com only works if you ad the www before the domain.